Tag Archive | Zwane

….SA on world stage for Parliamentary opening

….editorial 27 January…

Who is going to be doing what in the ANC as Parliament re-opens for the first session of 2018 is far from clear as the party cogitates over leadership factors. However, the vessel, the SS Rainbow Nation, may have righted itself and could commence the long and difficult voyage to economic recovery, although the vessel could well be said to be currently in damage control mode. But at last the glass is half full, not half empty.

For the next few weeks, all eyes will be on Parliament. The Bard could not have put it better. “All the world’s a stage: all have their exits and their entrances…”, to paraphrase a little.

Patience called for

Those who feel that injustices have taken place and people must go to jail will just simply have to wait and learn to control the anger and frustration in the coming weeks as we learn of further exposés indicating the real depth of the corruption and mismanagement during the Zuma era. The wound has been lanced but it took far too long for the doctor to arrive and apply a dressing.

In the meanwhile, somehow, South Africans are going to have to put this ten year period of atrocious governance behind and just simply get on with the job.. The endless denials of who did what to whom and whose hands are clean will go on for a very long time. Replays of past speeches which are totally contrary to current statements will be the order of the day and prepare for brazen lies about how so many people all miraculously got to stay at the Oberoi Hotel in Dubai, for example.

They told us so

AmaBhungane and Daily Maverick told us about the Vrede Dairy Project theft of R220m as long ago as June 2017, the scam set up by still current Minister Mosebenzi Zwane and ANC Secretary General Ace Magashule, then Free State Premier, and contemptuously planned as a siphon for personal financial gain. It was almost tiring to see the whole story splurged again in the weekend press. The “I am innocent until proven guilty” answers from Minister Zwana were equally as absurd.

Consequently, for the last six months, it has also been most difficult to watch Zwane strutting about in parliamentary portfolio committee meetings in the confident manner that is his hallmark busily destroying half of the mining industry on behalf of the Guptas knowing that all around him knew what he was up to.

Fortunately, partner Ace Magashule appears rarely Parliament. His time may come, however, once his position at Luthuli House is clarified.

Failure of disciplines

Under Jacob Zuma, the habit of state “fruitless and wasteful” expenditure has become endemic ever since the example had been set by the top with Nkandla. This was probably the first awful display of arrogance in the face of overwhelming knowledge of the truth. Now with Eskom debacle included, we know that that the total of money stolen in the Zuma era is around R700bn. This is according to the Institute of Internal Auditors.

If the “fruitless and wasteful” aspect of bad governance are added to this already frightful figure, then whomsoever said “Every nation gets the Government they deserve” is right, meaning of course that if Parliament and the Auditor General fail in oversight of government expenditure then all are poorer for not having applied consequences. A private member’s Bill, recently tabled in Parliament to give the AG more teeth, is most welcome.

How low can it get?

If the Sunday press coverage of the Vrede dairy swindle was not enough, once again we had to watch, with no satisfaction we might add, this same sickening story of corruption and greed repeated by a TV announcer standing outside a sliding gate and a wall located in the back and beyond of the Free State with a few building structures in the distance. The total sum of assets still technically belonging to the Department of Agriculture from their project from which the R220m had been blatantly diverted.

As had been told to us six months before by Amabhungane and by Jacques Pauw, Minister Zwane’s son who works for the Gupta family, was the recipient of a good slice of this money. Even the President’s son is deeply involved as a beneficiary. One turns one’s head away in shame. All in the name of a few cows and a group of hapless indigent farmers. A line which should not have been crossed.

Parliament is the people

What has been learnt is that Parliament is the people’s place of refuge. That is all we have, however ineffectual it may seem at times. The proof of this is in the pudding. That creaky old system invented centuries ago won the day and in the end the people spoke. Parliamentary enquiries, whilst not courts of law and cannot judge, have produced the questions which leave the ordinary person, “the people”, to judge for themselves.

It seems pretty common cause, therefore, that “people say” that President Jacob Zuma should no longer be allowed to occupy Tuinhuis with a whopping salary and a rather large home and family. The “people” were supported, brilliantly, by a strong civic voice and whistleblowers who have not benefited.

The stage is set and the play will end where it started. In the people’s Parliament.

Fresh start

Time now to forget the past. We must start again. It would be good to rise above the obsession to see these partners in crime and state capture go to jail. The systems, it appears, are back in place to ensure whether this happens or not.

Revenge is not the issue, however. The job in hand is to get on speedily repairing the damage. One remembers with warmth the leadership style, vision and courage endowed to us all by Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela, who asked us to rise above the sins of apartheid and focus only upon building a country. Many feel the time has come for the ANC to repeat the exercise.

A long road

Africa is indeed rising again and for the first time, in a long time, we can look forward to newscasts that don’t leave one feeling helpless, as has been the case ever since the Gupta e-mails emerged. In the few days after Cyril Ramaphosa returns from Davos (with whatever title he may have assumed by then) parliamentary business can return to normal.

All eyes in the next few weeks will focus upon the State of Nation Address and the Budget. Why exactly is the glass half full and not half empty? Because the governing party has been given a chance to put things right. Their endeavours to do so will be for all to see on the stage called Parliament.

Previous editorialsParliamentary start to 2018 will be stormy – ParlyReportSA Parliament SA: the top half of the iceberg.. – ParlyReportSA

Mining and petroleum bill to hit snags

Overwhelmingly evident is the cloud hanging over the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Amendment Bill (MPRDA), linked inextricably to a troubled Mining Charter, some movement on the MPRDA being necessary to restore stability to the mining industry in the form of legislative clarity.

Legislative clarity will also allow the petroleum and gas industry to hopefully go into a development phase. Here the players need an equal playing field, the State in this case getting a free stake possibly at 20% but paying no development costs since the State now has ownership of the resources.

Free lunches

There is one further possible hurdle on the horizon. Aside from issues surrounding the Charter, which is technically a non-parliamentary issue, the application of Parliamentary Rules regarding the great number of changes that are being made to the Bill raise procedural issues.

It is indeed a very different Bill to that which was voted through Parliament earlier and passed by the National Assembly.

For the moment, now that provincial opinion on the more recent changes to the MPRDA have been returned, the provinces each having voted and recorded their nine mandates on the subject, the idea is that the Bill can then finally be returned to the Presidency, possibly via the NA Committee to lodge the changes.

First things first

There is a sense emerging that the offshore gas industry is a little happier with the free carry proposals but on the other side of negotiations it appears, from the media, that the Chamber of Mines is struggling to find common ground with Minister Zwane on the Mining Charter, referred to in the MPRDA but not legislatively part of it.

It is difficult to imagine any Mining and Petroleum Resources Development Act, as amended, being in force without an agreed and new Mining Charter in place. However, developments in this area will have to be watched.

Last in queue

In the list of Bills before Parliament the MPRDA has been listed last (and therefore the longest under debate) for nearly three years, except for a short period when it went to the President. This reflects the long tussle involved.

The four major hindrances were the extended negotiations with the offshore petroleum industry on the free carry issue; the fact that President Zuma returned the Bill approved unsigned insisting that it be considered by all nine provinces; issues surrounding what the Minister has defined as “strategic minerals”; the thorny question of mineral beneficiation and the completion of the mining charter, to which the MPRDA refers but remains not incorporated.

Next process

Many more issues have still to be debated, whilst the basic parameters will have to come to a head on the parliamentary “rules of the game” regarding the passage of the legislation itself. Meanwhile, NCOP hearings on the Bill have been scheduled for the last two weeks of June 2017.

Throughout, the “elephant in the room” for the mining industry has remained the Charter itself which Minister Zwane has stated will be “the most revolutionary Charter ever produced.”

Possible slow down

Meanwhile on the MPRDA, Opposition members will no doubt study closely the Rules of Parliament which state, as was the case with the FICA Bill, that if a Bill is returned unsigned then only the issues for which the Bill was returned may be altered and then only once.

However, unlike the FICA Bill which was returned on the basis of one issue, that of unwarranted searches the MPRDA Bill was returned on the basis of lack of consultation with the provinces.

To amplify, if the President only returned the Bill on the basis that the NCOP and National House of Traditional Leaders had not been consulted, it may be a contested issue as to whether the Bill will be challenged under these Rules. This is a legal issue.

The Legal Resources Centre is quoted as being interested in such a challenge.

Looking ahead

For years, it has been the view of many that both industries that each should have its own “MPRDA”, especially in the light of the fact that both have their own specific and very different Charters.

Whilst crude oil, subsequently refined to petroleum and gas, are certainly natural resources now owned by the State, theoretically the only resources that are ‘mineral’ are those which have a crystalline molecular structure and are “mined”. This would naturally exclude extracted crude oil and gas.

Two is not one

Consequently, both industries, which fall under two government departments and which are distinctively different from one another, have historically been under one piece of legislation governing all geological resources.

This difference between the two industries is expressed in many ways. The petroleum industry is centred around its refineries, very much technical industries with ‘upstream’ components in importation and exploration and ‘downstream’ interests involving distribution, retailing and property interests. Their product is very directly linked to the cost of doing business and the cost of living.

Meanwhile, the mining industry is essentially involved in extraction with massive labour factors, high capital costs, sophisticated export involvements and beneficiation. Its product is closely linked to the survival of industry in general and is directly linked to GDP.

Legislatively, therefore, one garment certainly does not fit all – despite each industry having its own charter. Inevitably separate legislation will have to be developed but such changes are seen as being down down the road for the moment.

Damaging delays

Whatever route the Bill now takes in Parliament, any challenge to its progress will be particularly frustrating for investors if there are more delays. Those issues mainly arise in the mining sector where far more is at stake and consequently rating agencies are flagging Minister Zwane’s actions. The gas exploration industry is clearly tired of waiting.

The results of three days of parliamentary hearings on the Bill, which have included some side issues such as Shell SA on the future of shale gas and any demands from the House of Traditional Leaders, should prove interesting.

The major issue remains as to what is government policy is on the whole particularly regarding labour as distinct from just Cabinet ambitions for BEE participation percentages.

Next stages

Most attention will now fall upon the complementary non-legislative document, the Mining Charter, despite the unclear parliamentary situation. Following the public hearings, the NCOP Select Committee will summate these meetings and the relevant departments will respond over the following days.

Possibly, at some stage, Minister Zwane will address Parliament on the issue to clarify the situation of government’s view and relevant comment on the Bill will also no doubt arise from media briefings by the Ministry on both subjects. For the moment, much of the issue will be dictated by events outside of Parliament.

Bill originally approved by Cabinet

.….. sent to clients 20 Aug…..Going to the heart of the issues facing National Treasury on money laundering and financial crime, or in this specific case the Financial Intelligence Centre Amendment Bill (FIC Bill), is the failure of President Zuma to give assent to the Bill and to sign it into law.

The delay in adding his signature gives yet another signal that there is lack of interface in constitutional terms between the Presidency, the Cabinet, National Treasury and Parliament and all of this adds more uncertainty in the economic sphere.

The main objective of the FIC Bill is to conform with international pressure placed upon South Africa to update its governance ability to monitor international financial crime. During the passage of the Bill, however, it became quite evident to interested parties that the Bill could expose a lot more about South Africa’s own internal money laundering, inflows and outflows, than simply making a contribution to the global money laundering problem.

This, of course, was the original point made by international agencies when calling upon countries to agree to such legislation. Countries have to clean up their own affairs in the process.

Crime busting

The Bill intendsenhancing South Africa’s anti-money laundering (AML) processes to combat more effectively the crime of financing of terrorism to be achieved by amending the anchor Financial Intelligence Centre Act “so as to define certain expressions”.

However, in exposing monies destined for terrorism, a lot more than just terrorism could become evident in the category to be classed as “prominent persons”, a fact which has been endlessly debated in Parliament and why the Bill has come to the fore in the media.

More entrants

The fact that some in the Cabinet may not like the preamble to the Bill is evident, particularly expressed by Minister Zwane in his ridiculous call for a judicial investigation to investigate the motives for calling the banking sector to report to Treasury on individual groupings and persons and for an investigation into the banks themselves for closing the accounts of certain “prominent persons”.

The target of Minister Zwane’s diatribe, the major banks, are a grouping simply preparing for the FIC Bill to become law since they know it was tabled by the Minister of Finance, having been approved by the Cabinet in the first place and having made considerable input to the parliamentary process. Also they must realize that the Bill in turn will make considerable demands upon them in terms of time and money and will be a test of integrity for all.

Split in the ranks

The delay, even if for a moment, is one of many factors giving rise to the belief that the Cabinet is “at war with itself”, a fact which Deputy President Cyril Ramaphosa admits. President Zuma attempted dismally at first to distance himself from Minister Zwane’s attack on the banks, then seemingly relented but suspiciously will not let the banks proceed with the FIC Bill by making it law to set up the paper trails.

Commentators say the President is effectively involved in a web of issues involving alleged “state capture” and perhaps therefore instructions to hold up the Bill maybe upon advice from elsewhere from parties involved in the bigger picture.

No stroke of the pen

However, the very act of signing or not will eventually show if it is the President is alone in this matter since a cabinet statement in 2015 stated that the Cabinet had approved for the Bill for tabling.Parliament awaits, holding its breath, for clarification from the Presidency. President Zuma is now, of course, embroiled on issues over the Public Protector’s report on “stature capture” by the Gupta family and, like so many other important state issues, the FIC Bill has gone on to the back burner.

In the meanwhile others, including actors who would definitely be defined as “prominent persons” as defined by the new Bill, are now crowding the stage and expressing their views, so the FIC Bill must be touching a raw nerve somewhere.

The old argument

Despite the Bill being passed by State Law Advisors, now one Jimmy Manyi, previously a corporate public affairs head, a DG in the Department of Labour and previously a Cabinet spokesperson and recently President of the Progressive Professionals Forum – all in a short period of time – has lodged a constitutional challenge to the Bill, presumably on the basis of invasion of rights regarding pr1vacy.

MPs have complained that the Bill in question has been debated at length over one year at portfolio committee level; hearings were conducted with public expression therefore being accounted for and finally the Bill was passed by a unanimous vote in the National Assembly. Whether nefarious or not, one must assume that any delay by the President is for good financial reason and bearing in mind the call is in fact an international call to upgrade the SA money laundering watch, the stakes are high.

At this stage nothing is stated as fact and rumours abound. An exasperated Minister of Finance Gordon Pravin stated in an interview run by E-NCA, “Well if I can’t get the Bill through then we must just try something else.” He added, “They had just better come and arrest me. What have I done?”, he asked.

The aim

Indeed, the parliamentary record shows quite clearly what Minister Pravin has done. By introducing this Bill and having had it agreed to in the National Assembly, a paper trail is to be established in conjunction with banks on any suspicious movement of money involving “prominent persons”. Locked cupboards will be looked into therefore and it seems as if someone or a section in the Cabinet has had second thoughts about the Bill.

Hopefully, the stall is only temporary and the Public Protector’s report is released

Aims of Bill

Treasury originally said in their briefing to Parliament that the four principal objects of the Bill were to align the country with international standards on AML and to counter terrorist bodies; to enhance customer due diligence within financial institutions; to provide for the implementation of the UN security council resolutions relating to the freezing of assets of persons suspected of financial crimes; and for the FIC to introduce a risk-based approach by financial entities to the current aspects international financial crime.

Treasury countered any argument that dis-investment would be encouraged by the Bill with the answer that a lack of compliance with international rules by South would be worse but now the silence on the FIC Bill seems to have taken a back seat in National Assembly questioning in the face of rows over state funding, “state capture” and individual financial investigative probes.

Prominent persons

Much debate, took place at the time within the Standing Committee on Finance when the Bill was originally debated over the definition of “prominent persons both domestic and foreign”. These were the persons who were to be monitored as part of the Treasury’s appeal to banks “to know their clients better”. The meetings were chaired by the obdurate, diligent and politically respected Yunus Carrim (SACP) and finally recommended to the House.

Treasury’s Ismail Momoniat was at pains to state to Parliament at the time that “there was no implication or presumption that prominent persons being investigated were presumed to be involved in any financial crime.”

Getting to know you

Probably the provisions most likely to affect entities operating in South Africa are the clauses affecting due diligence. Those that are accountable in terms of the Act will be required to undertake ongoing customer due diligence overviews in order to establish the identity of “the beneficial owner” and a customer’s full identity and whereabouts.

This might be where the problem lies for Cabinet, not necessarily just about the “G people”, as referred to in Parliament by David Maynier, Shadow Finance Minister (DA), but which might involve issues of party funding – the sources of which at the moment do not have to be declared to Parliament.

Objective views

As put by Roger Southall, Professor of Sociology, University of Johannesburg and quoted in précis form by Creamer Polity, “The ANC is appropriately anti-corruption in its official stance, and indeed has put in place important legislation and mechanisms to control malfeasance. Equally, however, it has proved reluctant to undertake enquiries which could prove embarrassing.” Parastatals still account for around 15% of GDP, Southhall notes.

Whilst Minister Lynne Brown said she was determined to overhaul all state entities, nobody its seems was ready for President Zuma to assume the chair of the new idea of a State Owned Enterprises Council, meaning that he is in charge of para-state strategy – the policy of which was announced many months ago in that government wants a greater slice of the R500m spend on goods and services to go to emergent suppliers.

President Zuma said in Parliament on that issue that the reason for the consolidation was to bring about cross-cutting coordination as a policy within state utilities.

Getting control

Southall continues in his article in similar vein, “The ANC continues to regard the parastatals as ‘sites of transformation’ with certain corporations distributing financial largesse to secure contracts and favour from government. However, their success in so doing is hard to prove given the secrecy of party funding. Secondly, ANC politicians at all levels of government have sought to influence the tender process in their favour.”

On the good side, the Department of Public Service and Administration has, for instance, a draft a Bill underway for Parliament that will require all government departments to put in place measures to prohibit employees and those in special consultancy positions from “directly or indirectly” doing business with government.

Furthermore, the Public Finance Management Act, signed by President Zuma, has proven to be a well-tuned tool to control misdirected state expenditure. The FIC Bill will be the anchor legislation needed to dig deeper into AML money movements.

Who blinks first

With the FIC Bill, the next move then must come from the Presidency, if he remains in office, to give good reason to send the Bill back to the Parliament despite the agreement of the South African banking system to comply with Treasury requirements to report. This is a day-to-day developing issue.

Quite clearly, some banks have forestalled their problems by refusing to handle certain business banking accounts of “prominent persons”, perhaps pre-empting that the Bill would receive Presidential assent and thus earning the ire of Minister Zwane “in his personal capacity”.

Whether the FIC Bill might get further to the very roots of the party funding system is another matter but for the moment the focus was on “prominent persons” and the necessity to get the banks into action in terms of the law.

Meanwhile, the Portfolio Committee on Trade and Industry will continue to debate the “Twin Peaks” legislation which will again tighten up on banking and financial procedures on both regulatory and prudential aspects. But here again, there might be delays.

SARS role at border posts being clarified …. In adopting the Border Management Authority (BMA) Bill, Parliament’s Portfolio Committee on Home Affairs agreed with a wording that at all future one-stop border […]